would my system bottleneck with a 970?

[nirrtix]

or would I be better off with a 960? I guess the other question is how much of a performance difference will a 960 and a 970 be? Both would be a significant upgrade for my machine.

 

[jediTT]

I don't think a 2600k would bottleneck a 970, for sure wouldn't bottleneck a 960. I think there's about $100 difference between 960 and 970 and I'd say in game difference would be 960 = medium/high 970 = high/ultra

 

[mapesdhs]

There's a significant performance gap between a 960 and a 970 (much too big IMO, the market needs a 960 Ti, though the pricing has become too high now right across the board, or maybe it's just exchange rate fun affecting costs here in the UK). I don't like the 960, just too far down the performance scale IMO, it overlaps way too much with older products (including the top end of the 600/700s). The 970 is definitely the sweetspot atm on the NVIDIA side, though 2nd-hand 980s are becoming increasingly attractive.

As for the CPU, an overclocked 2600K will not bottleneck a 970; heck, I'm using a 980 and my 2700K @ 5GHz runs great (results on my site here, or PM me if you'd like some links to various 3DMark numbers, not written up the data for them yet). At stock speed though, there might be measurable differences between a 2600K and the latest tech for some games, but measurable doesn't necessarily mean the absolute fps rates are too low (depends on the game, resolution, etc.)

Thus, if you're worried about any kind of bottleneck, just oc your CPU. Most 2600Ks should be able to handle 4.5GHz with ease, though that's why I keep getting 2700Ks instead because every 2700K I've tried has handled 5GHz no problem (built six such systems so far; even a standard TRUE with one fan is enough, though I use an H80 in final builds, with better fans).

One other thing: with its larger RAM, a 970 is a better candidate for adding a 2nd card in the future for SLI. Much less VRAM capacity futureproofing with the 960.

Ian.

 

[nirrtix]

mape while I made my machine to overclock... I am a little leery of burning up the chip, I just do not have the money to replace the chip.....

 

[mapesdhs]

That's a very valid concern. Sensible overclocking revolves around sensible temperatures and voltages. Decide on a target, however modest that may be, decide on a load temp over which you don't want to go, ditto a core voltage, then see what's possible. Any 2600K though should easily be able to handle 4.5 with ease, assuming adequate cooling and a decent mbd (I've only been using top-end boards, mainly the ASUS Maximus IV Extreme, so I can get 5GHz every time with a 2700K). Above 4.6 or 4.7 is where the real variance and fine tuning will kick in for the 2600K, as it definitely has generally lower max limits than the 2700K.

If you want to play it completely safe though, then stick to a max of say 4.3 or 4.4. Personally I'd find such a low oc with a 2600K a tad embarassing, but it's still a useful speedup over the stock speed.

NB: having the RAM maxed out to 32GB will likely affect what oc is possible, because of the higher strain on the CPU's RAM system. Still, the Sabertooth should be a good board for this. I'd be amazed if you couldn't reach 4.3 to 4.5 with a good voltage and good load temps (below 75C, which is miles away from the max threshold).

Have a look on the relevant OCN threads for info, the 2600K club, Sabertooth club, Z77 club, that sort of thing, bound to be quite a few.

However, if you do not want to overclock your CPU at all, then yes a newer platform definitely would offer a performance advantage. I like SandyBridge precisely because it is so ridiculously overclockable, to an extent that typically more than makes up for its lower stock speed compared to newer CPUs, and the higher power usage is more than offset by the far cheaper CPU cost compared to a new Skylake.

Anyway, do whatever you're comfortable with, and good luck!! 8)